Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02760-07
Original file (02760-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100


 TJR
 Docket No: 2760-07
18 January 2008








This i s in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 January 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 4 October 1983 at age 19 and served for nearly a year without disciplinary incident, but on 28 September 1984 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for dereliction of duty and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 15 days and a suspended reduction to paygrade E-1.
On 7 February and again on 2 April 1985 you received NJP for two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling four days. On 19 March 1987 you received your fourth NJP for two periods of UA totalling five days and wrongful use of marijuana. The punishment imposed was extra duty and restriction for 45 days, reduction to paygrade E-2, and a $738 forfeiture of pay.





On 6 April 1987 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Subsequently, you submitted a written request for a general discharge. However, on 14 April 1987, your commanding officer recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On 11 May 1987 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 18 May 1987, you were so separated.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, post service conduct, and the passage of time. It also considered your assertion that you were experiencing personal problems for which you were not afforded assistance. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, which resulted in four NJPs and included drug abuse. Finally, no discharge is automatically upgraded due solely to the passage of time or an individual’s good post service conduct. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,



W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07731-07

    Original file (07731-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08721-07

    Original file (08721-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04503-07

    Original file (04503-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2008. You were also in a UA status during the period from 1 to 5 September 1989. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3643 13

    Original file (NR3643 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02392-09

    Original file (02392-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2010. Documentary material congidered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 March 1988 you received NUP for two periods of UA totalling two days, failure to obey a lawful order, and four periods of absence from...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01116-07

    Original file (01116-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material Considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 12 May 1987 after four years of prior honorable service. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09184-04

    Original file (09184-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 3 October 1985 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident until 11...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10956-02

    Original file (10956-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2003. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. However, on 18 December 1986, this suspended sentence was vacated due to your continued misconduct, specifically, a four day period of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09216-04

    Original file (09216-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 31 January 1984 at age 18. On 31 July 1986 you received NJP for assault...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11189-06

    Original file (11189-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy on 20 April 1988 after three years of prior honorable service. On 11 March...